AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

# FAQ

Q: What are the two GPUs compared in this analysis?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD106 chip.

Q: How do the process nodes differ between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller node on the NVIDIA part contributes to a higher transistor density of 121.8M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm² on the AMD card.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs have?

A: Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation provides 256.0 GB/s, a 48% higher figure.

Q: Which GPU has a higher base and boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation runs at a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1695 MHz. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 operates at a much lower base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz.

Q: What is the power draw of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W, making it a low-power, single-slot design. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 115 W and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) package.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API feature levels?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The key hardware differences lie in compute resources: the NVIDIA card has 4608 shading units and 144 tensor cores, while the AMD card has 1792 shading units and no tensor cores.

# Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 33 chip with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation and is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 204 mm² and contains 13,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². This chip is designed for low-power, professional workstation workloads, with a TDP of 55 W and a single-slot form factor.

The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD106 chip. It belongs to the GeForce 30-series family and the Ada-MW generation. The chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 188 mm² and 22,900 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The higher density reflects the smaller node and the inclusion of specialized hardware such as tensor cores.

One of the most notable architectural differences is the compute layout. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card has 4608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, 48 raster operation units, 36 ray tracing cores, and 144 tensor cores. The NVIDIA GPU far exceeds the AMD part in shading units and adds tensor cores for AI-accelerated workloads, a feature absent from the AMD specification.

Both GPUs support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, the underlying hardware implementations differ. The AMD card uses a 128-bit memory bus with GDDR6 memory at 10.8 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA card uses a 128-bit bus with GDDR6 memory at 16 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card also connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, whereas the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The physical design also diverges. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a single-slot card with dimensions of 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, and it requires no power connectors. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is an IGP with no defined dimensions, designed for portable devices, and also requires no power connectors. The AMD card offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the NVIDIA card's display outputs are portable device dependent.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data in the database shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and neither card has an average benchmark score or wins tally. Both cards share an equal percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs, indicating they sit at the median of the performance distribution in the database. With no benchmark scores, wins, or nearest rivals listed, the comparison must rely entirely on the specification data.

The most significant performance indicator is raw compute throughput. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 performance, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS in both precision modes. This means the NVIDIA card has approximately 98% higher FP32 throughput, nearly double the AMD card's capability. The texture rate follows a similar pattern: the NVIDIA card reaches 244.1 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s for the AMD card, a 98% advantage. The pixel rate is closer, with the NVIDIA card at 81.36 GPixel/s and the AMD card at 70.40 GPixel/s, a 16% difference.

Memory bandwidth is another clear differentiator. The NVIDIA card's 256.0 GB/s exceeds the AMD card's 172.8 GB/s by 48%. This bandwidth advantage, combined with the higher clock speeds (1695 MHz boost versus 1100 MHz boost), positions the NVIDIA card as the stronger performer in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The AMD card's base clock of 330 MHz is notably lower, though the boost clock narrows the gap.

The shading unit count reinforces the NVIDIA advantage. With 4608 shading units versus 1792, the NVIDIA card has 2.57 times more compute units. The NVIDIA card also has 144 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely, giving it a dedicated path for AI and machine learning tasks. The ray tracing core counts are closer: 36 for NVIDIA versus 28 for AMD, a 29% difference. The texture mapping units favor NVIDIA at 144 versus 112, while the raster operation units favor AMD at 64 versus 48.

Given the lack of benchmark entries, the specification data provides the only measurable comparison. The NVIDIA card shows a consistent lead across compute, memory, and specialized hardware metrics, while the AMD card counters with a lower power envelope and a slightly higher raster operation unit count.

# Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification field. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process node, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses a 5 nm node. The transistor count is 13,300 million for AMD and 22,900 million for NVIDIA, with die sizes of 204 mm² and 188 mm² respectively. The transistor density is 65.2M per mm² for AMD and 121.8M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The AMD card has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, while the NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1695 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: AMD runs at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective), while NVIDIA runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Memory bandwidth is 172.8 GB/s for AMD and 256.0 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Compute resources show a wide gap. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. The NVIDIA card has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 36 RT cores, and 144 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 70.40 GPixel/s for AMD and 81.36 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. The texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s for AMD and 244.1 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 7.885 TFLOPS for AMD and 15.62 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The AMD card has a TDP of 55 W, is single-slot, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 115 W and is an IGP. The AMD card measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the NVIDIA card has no listed dimensions. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD and PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD and portable device dependent for NVIDIA.

The release dates differ: the AMD card was released on 2025-08-02, while the NVIDIA card was released on 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA card lists its predecessor as Ampere-MW and successor as Blackwell-MW, while the AMD card lists its predecessor as Radeon Pro Vega with no successor. Both cards are currently active in production.

# The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy between these two GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation leads in nearly every compute metric: FP32 throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS, texture rate of 244.1 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s, and memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s. The NVIDIA card also has 4608 shading units, 144 tensor cores, and a higher boost clock of 1695 MHz, all of which point to higher raw performance.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 holds advantages in power efficiency and physical design. Its 55 W TDP is less than half of the NVIDIA card's 115 W, and its single-slot form factor with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs makes it a straightforward workstation add-in card. The AMD card also has more raster operation units (64 versus 48), which can benefit certain rasterization-heavy tasks, and it uses a 204 mm² die that is larger than the NVIDIA card's 188 mm².

The choice between these GPUs depends on the workload requirements. For compute-intensive tasks, the NVIDIA card is the stronger option based on the recorded specifications. For low-power, space-constrained systems, the AMD card offers a viable alternative. The equal percentile rank of 50 for both cards suggests they occupy the same tier in the overall GPU distribution, but the specification gap indicates that the NVIDIA card delivers more performance within that tier.

# Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation: This GPU wins in raw compute performance. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS is nearly double the AMD card's 7.885 TFLOPS, making it the choice for general-purpose compute, scientific simulations, and rendering workloads. The 144 tensor cores provide dedicated AI acceleration, a feature the AMD card lacks entirely. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, 48% higher than AMD's, benefits large dataset processing and texture-heavy applications. The 36 ray tracing cores exceed AMD's 28, giving it an edge in ray-traced rendering. The higher texture rate of 244.1 GTexel/s supports more detailed texture filtering. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides double the bus bandwidth of the AMD card's x8 connection, which helps with data transfer in multi-GPU or high-I/O scenarios.

AMD Radeon PRO W7400: This GPU wins in power efficiency and workstation integration. The 55 W TDP allows deployment in systems with limited cooling or power budgets, and the single-slot design with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs supports multi-monitor professional setups directly. The 64 raster operation units exceed the NVIDIA card's 48, which can improve fill-rate-bound tasks such as certain 2D workloads or framebuffer operations. The larger die size of 204 mm² does not translate to a performance advantage but indicates a different physical design approach. The lower power draw also reduces thermal management requirements, making it suitable for compact workstations. The 172.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, while lower than NVIDIA's, remains sufficient for many professional applications that do not saturate memory throughput. The 28 ray tracing cores still provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, just at a lower count than the NVIDIA card.